Do You Remember Terri Schiavo? Today She Might Be Able to Tell Us Her Choice to Live or Die

Nov 14, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: The Hedgehog Blog

Do you remember Terri Schiavo? She was the victim of an accident, a woman in a chronic vegetative state, with no medically discerniable brain activity.

Comments
1 - 20 of 31 Comments Last updated Jan 1, 2013
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Jan

Victoria, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Nov 15, 2012
 

Judged:

10

7

2

No comment from the pro-death crowd, I see. You've just been proven wrong and you don't have anything to say for yourselves?
Svaha

Clearwater, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Nov 15, 2012
 

Judged:

7

4

2

Jan wrote:
No comment from the pro-death crowd, I see. You've just been proven wrong and you don't have anything to say for yourselves?
Can't you read dear? After 15 years most of Mrs Schiavo's brain was liquified into spinal fluid so there wouldn't be much in the way of brain cells firing to generate concious thought. That's why no one pays any attention to some of you "pro-life" people. You don't THINK.

By the way, Mr Schindler's mother's brain was firing and she was well aware of her surroundings when her son decided "she wouldn't want to live like that" and the plug was pulled. Which doesn't bother you "prolife" people at all probably because you "prolife" people seem to think you have the right to decide WHO lives and WHO dies. Very "prolife" you meddling little busy-body:-)
Jan

Victoria, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Nov 15, 2012
 

Judged:

10

6

4

Svaha wrote:
<quoted text>
Can't you read dear? After 15 years most of Mrs Schiavo's brain was liquified into spinal fluid so there wouldn't be much in the way of brain cells firing to generate concious thought. That's why no one pays any attention to some of you "pro-life" people. You don't THINK.
By the way, Mr Schindler's mother's brain was firing and she was well aware of her surroundings when her son decided "she wouldn't want to live like that" and the plug was pulled. Which doesn't bother you "prolife" people at all probably because you "prolife" people seem to think you have the right to decide WHO lives and WHO dies. Very "prolife" you meddling little busy-body:-)
Why do you always assume that I supported the killing of Mr. Schindler's mother? In every single post where that issue has come up, I have told you that I do not support that killing, yet you keep repeating the assumption that I do, like the mindless robot that you are. It would be very inconsistent of me to support one such killing while opposing another. In that respect I do agree with you.

The point is that people in a persistent vegetative state have now been proven conscious. The killing of Terri Schiavo was based on the assumption that anyone in a PVS must be unconscious. But I guess it strains your little mind too much to actually look at a fact that goes against your preconceptions.
Svaha

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Nov 15, 2012
 

Judged:

3

1

1

Jan wrote:
<quoted text>Why do you always assume that I supported the killing of Mr. Schindler's mother? In every single post where that issue has come up, I have told you that I do not support that killing, yet you keep repeating the assumption that I do, like the mindless robot that you are. It would be very inconsistent of me to support one such killing while opposing another. In that respect I do agree with you.
The point is that people in a persistent vegetative state have now been proven conscious. The killing of Terri Schiavo was based on the assumption that anyone in a PVS must be unconscious. But I guess it strains your little mind too much to actually look at a fact that goes against your preconceptions.
What makes you think I don't agree that Mr Schindler did what he personally thought what his mother would want for herself? His hypocracy when it comes to his daughter is breathtaking wouldn't you agree? With regards to the rest of your post, as the "prolife" person shrieks that she doesn't TRUST women to do the right thing by themselves and their families and shrieks that next of kin will do right by their loved ones. She, and ONLY she can speak for everyone on the planet because she, and only she knows what everyone would do for themselves. I trust that people will take care of their own on their own terms, not mine not yours. Sorry that you don't.
Amazed

Saint Paul, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Nov 15, 2012
 

Judged:

13

9

9

Jan wrote:
No comment from the pro-death crowd, I see. You've just been proven wrong and you don't have anything to say for yourselves?
One doctor designing his own test, conducting the test and interpreting his own test results- no peer review, no outside inspections, no independent reviews?

Until this is reviewed and can be repeated it is hardly science.

It might qualify as ground breaking research but it hardly merits "rewriting medical textbooks". The doctor seems to have a pretty high opinion of himself but little regard for scientific method.

The supermarket tabloid crowd will embrace anything agreeable with their own religious, social or political agenda without thought or question.
Amazed

Saint Paul, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Nov 15, 2012
 

Judged:

12

8

5

By the way this really isn't much different from the stir caused by Dr Stephen Laureys over Ron Houben:

http://trueslant.com/michaelshermer/2009/11/2...

Of course using fMRI adds a new twist to Facilitated Communication. It might be the most expensive device ever used for such psuedoscience.
Svaha

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

5

3

1

Amazed wrote:
<quoted text>
One doctor designing his own test, conducting the test and interpreting his own test results- no peer review, no outside inspections, no independent reviews?
Until this is reviewed and can be repeated it is hardly science.
It might qualify as ground breaking research but it hardly merits "rewriting medical textbooks". The doctor seems to have a pretty high opinion of himself but little regard for scientific method.
The supermarket tabloid crowd will embrace anything agreeable with their own religious, social or political agenda without thought or question.
I was checking out at the grocery store when I read the headlines on one of those magazines "I was Big Foot's Love Slave". Isn't that where one gathers reliable information? They never lie you know:-)
Jan

Victoria, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

3

2

1

Svaha wrote:
<quoted text>
What makes you think I don't agree that Mr Schindler did what he personally thought what his mother would want for herself? His hypocracy when it comes to his daughter is breathtaking wouldn't you agree? With regards to the rest of your post, as the "prolife" person shrieks that she doesn't TRUST women to do the right thing by themselves and their families and shrieks that next of kin will do right by their loved ones. She, and ONLY she can speak for everyone on the planet because she, and only she knows what everyone would do for themselves. I trust that people will take care of their own on their own terms, not mine not yours. Sorry that you don't.
You may agree with what Mr. Schindler did to his mother, but I don't, and I never have. And I do agree with you that he is inconsistent, but I'm not sure why you rub this in my face every time I raise the issue of whether or not it is wrong to kill the sick. You may be creating a disagreement between us on an issue where you and I actually agree.
Jan

Victoria, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

5

3

3

Amazed wrote:
<quoted text>
One doctor designing his own test, conducting the test and interpreting his own test results- no peer review, no outside inspections, no independent reviews?
Until this is reviewed and can be repeated it is hardly science.
It might qualify as ground breaking research but it hardly merits "rewriting medical textbooks". The doctor seems to have a pretty high opinion of himself but little regard for scientific method.
The supermarket tabloid crowd will embrace anything agreeable with their own religious, social or political agenda without thought or question.
You sound as though you are really anxious for him to be proven wrong. I'm really looking forward to seeing your reaction if he turns out to be right.
Jan

Victoria, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

5

2

1

Amazed wrote:
By the way this really isn't much different from the stir caused by Dr Stephen Laureys over Ron Houben:
http://trueslant.com/michaelshermer/2009/11/2...
Of course using fMRI adds a new twist to Facilitated Communication. It might be the most expensive device ever used for such psuedoscience.
Rom Houben is a very unfortunate case. The issue of whether or not he is conscious got confused with a separate issue; whether or not the communication method being used was correct. If Houben does indeed have locked-in syndrome, he is most definitely conscious. His consciousness is much more likely than the consciousness of a person like Terri Schiavo, but if PVS people turn out to be conscious, Rom Houben definitely would be.

An MRI is good, though. It shows more about what is really going on in a person's brain.
Svaha

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Nov 16, 2012
 
Jan wrote:
<quoted text>You may agree with what Mr. Schindler did to his mother, but I don't, and I never have. And I do agree with you that he is inconsistent, but I'm not sure why you rub this in my face every time I raise the issue of whether or not it is wrong to kill the sick. You may be creating a disagreement between us on an issue where you and I actually agree.
So you agree that you and people like you should be the only ones who choose what's best for people for making these decisions? Next of kin, friends, those who know the individuals shouldn't have a say in the matter. Just you and people like you. In case the friends and family don't make the "correct" choice?
Jan

Victoria, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

4

3

1

Svaha wrote:
<quoted text>
So you agree that you and people like you should be the only ones who choose what's best for people for making these decisions? Next of kin, friends, those who know the individuals shouldn't have a say in the matter. Just you and people like you. In case the friends and family don't make the "correct" choice?
I agree with you that Mr. Schindler was hypocritical on the issue. That is all I agree with you on.

I believe that people who value life should be the people who make the decisions. Ideally, there would be no decision at all. The right to live would be as uncontroversial as cannibalism is. I don't see a lot of articles on whether or not eating one's fellow man is a good thing or not, and the right of the sick to medical care should be just as uncontroversial.
Svaha

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Jan wrote:
<quoted text>I agree with you that Mr. Schindler was hypocritical on the issue. That is all I agree with you on.
I believe that people who value life should be the people who make the decisions. Ideally, there would be no decision at all. The right to live would be as uncontroversial as cannibalism is. I don't see a lot of articles on whether or not eating one's fellow man is a good thing or not, and the right of the sick to medical care should be just as uncontroversial.
Yes I know. If people, if families don't like the decisions you make for them you'll just force them into it. For their on good of course.
Amazed

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

8

6

5

Jan wrote:
<quoted text>You sound as though you are really anxious for him to be proven wrong. I'm really looking forward to seeing your reaction if he turns out to be right.
Not really anxious for him to be proven wrong so much as anxious to know whether this is more self serving hoopla in the form of self aggrandizing press releases that benefit only the researcher but not the test subjects or any future patients.
Amazed

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

9

7

5

Jan wrote:
<quoted text>Rom Houben is a very unfortunate case. The issue of whether or not he is conscious got confused with a separate issue; whether or not the communication method being used was correct. If Houben does indeed have locked-in syndrome, he is most definitely conscious. His consciousness is much more likely than the consciousness of a person like Terri Schiavo, but if PVS people turn out to be conscious, Rom Houben definitely would be.
An MRI is good, though. It shows more about what is really going on in a person's brain.
From what was published the only evidence of conciousness was the facilitated communication. Other attempts to establish some form of communication were said to have been unsuccessful with various health related reasons given.

And yes fMRI is a great acheivement that hopefully won't be misused in research to further agendas other than an agenda that benefits the test subjects and providing information that could benefit future patients.
Amazed

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Nov 17, 2012
 

Judged:

8

6

4

Jan wrote:
<quoted text>Rom Houben is a very unfortunate case. The issue of whether or not he is conscious got confused with a separate issue; whether or not the communication method being used was correct. If Houben does indeed have locked-in syndrome, he is most definitely conscious. His consciousness is much more likely than the consciousness of a person like Terri Schiavo, but if PVS people turn out to be conscious, Rom Houben definitely would be.
An MRI is good, though. It shows more about what is really going on in a person's brain.
The focus should have very rapidly shifted to the exploitation and abuse of Rom Houben. Epic fail by those that should have been the most concerned for his well being and particularly by those that had a duty to protect him.

As you might recall it was claimed Rom Houben was planning to write a book. It was clear early on that the story wasn't so much about ground breaking research or new discoveries as it was the age old story of corruption,greed and exploitation.

In the end pro life groups hurtled their usual insults and accusations at the skeptics who had immediately stepped forward and pointed out that faciliatated communication had long ago been debunked.

For whatever reasons the pro life folks wanted (and continue to demand) mindless and unquestioning admiration for psuedoscience and its practitioners. Just as they demand that these press releases from researchers be mindlessly and unquestioningly accepted and applauded all the while parroting the claims as if those claims were proven or somehow promoted or converted from one mans conclusions about his own research into facts worth repeating.

Mindless followers are hardly helpful in the cause of determining whether folks like Rom Houben still have an intact mind.
Jan

Victoria, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Nov 17, 2012
 

Judged:

4

2

1

Amazed wrote:
<quoted text>
Not really anxious for him to be proven wrong so much as anxious to know whether this is more self serving hoopla in the form of self aggrandizing press releases that benefit only the researcher but not the test subjects or any future patients.
How could the patients be harmed? If they really are conscious, being properly diagnosed would be a blessing to them. If they are totally unconscious, they are not suffering either way. A patient should be given the benefit of the doubt if there is any possibility of consciousness.
Amazed

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Nov 17, 2012
 

Judged:

8

6

6

Jan wrote:
<quoted text>How could the patients be harmed? If they really are conscious, being properly diagnosed would be a blessing to them. If they are totally unconscious, they are not suffering either way. A patient should be given the benefit of the doubt if there is any possibility of consciousness.
Pretty clearly Rom Houben did not benefit in any way from being exploited by a researcher who was more concerned about headlines rather than in whether the patient benefitted in any way from forced participation in his experiments (Mr Houben was in no position and no condition to offer anything that resembled consent or anything that could be interpreted as informed consent).

Mr Houben certainly was in no position or condition to contract for any book deals or exercise any control over his finances.

From Mr Houbens perspective it doesn't change anything whether the "proper" diagnosis is PVS or whether it is MCS. There is no known treatment for either that would improve his condition or restore his health. Under the law in his country a written advanced directive is required and nothing I read regarding the case indicated he had one.

Medical testing is not done for the sake of the researcher or practitioner or even to satisfy family members curiousity. Tests are not performed simply because they are available. A test is only merrited when it is useful for determining a proper treatment and a test is only valuable if it benefits the patient and has some value for the patient such as assisting in determining a proper treatment or determining if making changes in treatment is warranted.

These patients are not objects or property to be exploited or experimented upon or to have their person intruded upon based on the reasoning "If they are totally unconscious, they are not suffering either way."

By being unconcious they do not automatically grant their consent to being experimented with or upon.

They retain their humanity and personhood and they retain their rights and their rights should be considered and respected. There are many ways a person can be harmed all of which have nothing to do with medicine or medical treatment or whether they have been given a "proper" diagnosis.

There is no blessing that comes out of exploitation.

It seems that you share somewhat the same perspective on what might be considered a "blessing" as Indiana GOP U.S. Senate candidate Richard Mourdock.
Jan

Victoria, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

3

1

1

Amazed wrote:
<quoted text>
Pretty clearly Rom Houben did not benefit in any way from being exploited by a researcher who was more concerned about headlines rather than in whether the patient benefitted in any way from forced participation in his experiments (Mr Houben was in no position and no condition to offer anything that resembled consent or anything that could be interpreted as informed consent).
Mr Houben certainly was in no position or condition to contract for any book deals or exercise any control over his finances.
From Mr Houbens perspective it doesn't change anything whether the "proper" diagnosis is PVS or whether it is MCS. There is no known treatment for either that would improve his condition or restore his health. Under the law in his country a written advanced directive is required and nothing I read regarding the case indicated he had one.
Medical testing is not done for the sake of the researcher or practitioner or even to satisfy family members curiousity. Tests are not performed simply because they are available. A test is only merrited when it is useful for determining a proper treatment and a test is only valuable if it benefits the patient and has some value for the patient such as assisting in determining a proper treatment or determining if making changes in treatment is warranted.
These patients are not objects or property to be exploited or experimented upon or to have their person intruded upon based on the reasoning "If they are totally unconscious, they are not suffering either way."
By being unconcious they do not automatically grant their consent to being experimented with or upon.
They retain their humanity and personhood and they retain their rights and their rights should be considered and respected. There are many ways a person can be harmed all of which have nothing to do with medicine or medical treatment or whether they have been given a "proper" diagnosis.
There is no blessing that comes out of exploitation.
It seems that you share somewhat the same perspective on what might be considered a "blessing" as Indiana GOP U.S. Senate candidate Richard Mourdock.
Does Rom Houben have MCS? I thought it was locked-in syndrome, which is a completely different thing. A person with MCS may have some consciousness but is not fully conscious, at least not most of the time. A person with locked-in syndrome is paralyzed but fully conscious.

If you were in such a condition, wouldn't you want to be diagnosed properly? I think it would be pretty miserable to be conscious while those around you believe that you are unconscious. If I were in such a position I would not split hairs over the issue of whether or not I were being "exploited." Would you? Honestly?
unreal

Old Bridge, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Nov 18, 2012
 
Amazed wrote:
By the way this really isn't much different from the stir caused by Dr Stephen Laureys over Ron Houben:
http://trueslant.com/michaelshermer/2009/11/2...
Of course using fMRI adds a new twist to Facilitated Communication. It might be the most expensive device ever used for such psuedoscience.
FC was considered a "breakthrough" among the autism community, those who bought into the BS. Any movement was considered "communication" and it was of course, interpreted by the tester/aide.

BS pure and simple.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••